Author: A. Zanchetta
Date: 10:45:51 11/06/05
Go up one level in this thread
On November 06, 2005 at 12:56:07, Uri Blass wrote: ....... I simply do not agree : 1) Resurrection's hardware is more powerful that dedicated computers but far behind today's PC. Running a match between Fruit on Res and any other program on a PC is like running a game between a PC and Sargon III running on my Apple II : useless. If you want to see how Fruit performs against other programs, put it on a PC ! One example : Fruit on Pocket PC. If you look closely, you will see that Res hardware is a lot closer to a Pocket Pc than to a PC. Fruit 2.1 on my laptop evaluated approximately one million positions / second (that's what I remember from the tests I made with Fruit 2.1 when I was porting it to PPC) and Fruit on a Medium range pocket PC evaluates 30 000 positions / second. I will never make a match between Fruit on my Pocket PC and another program on my PC and try to conclude something from this match !!!! 2) The Res is a module for dedicated chess computers and it has to be compared to other dedicated chess computers. Most people interested by PC vs PC programs are not interested by dedicated machines and vice versa. 3) I also do not agree about your conclusion that Active Chess is the only chance for another dedicated computer to fight against Fruit, and only counting on a bug in time management. I think that longer time controls will reduce the difference between different hardwares and therefore be more significant of the difference between the programs themselves. Of course, I think Res/Fruit will win a 40 moves / 2 hours games against any chess computer, but I would like to see a measure of their strength differences. Alain
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.